
.(x (o 



TESTING FARMS IN THE SOUTH FOR 

EFFICIENCY IN MANAGEMENT 



C. L. GOODRICH 

Agriculturist 




UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
DEPARTMENT CIRCULAR 83 



OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY 

Contribution from the Office of Farm Management 

H. C. TAYLOR, Chief 



„, . - , r. r February, 1920 

Washington, u. L.. 



WASHINGTON : QOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 1820 



i':.c^&os^ 



"PRACTICAL TESTS, by the application of which ex- 
tension workers, county agents, and farmers them- 
selves may roughly determine whether or not a given 
farm in a group is being efficiently managed, are outlined 
in this circular. 

These tests have been formulated with special reference 
to the Southern States. 







TESTING FARMS IN THE SOUTH FOR EFFICIENCY IN 
MANAGEMENT. 



JT IS THE DUTY AND PRIVILEGE of the farmer so to man- 
age his land, labor, and working equipment as to produce the 
largest net return without hazard to his personal rights and obli- 
gations. This net return is dependent upon the efficiency with which 
he manages and combines the many factors which influence the 
success of his business. 

Some of the more important of these factors are: (1) The produc- 
tion of family and farm supplies; (2) the yield per acre of crops; 
(3) the production per head of live stock; (4) the organization of 
the crop acreage; and (5) adjustment between labor requirements 
and labor supply. There are also certain secondary factors directly 
influencing the main factors. 

This circular is intended to present a simple method of testing 
the farmer's influence and efficiency in dealing with these factors, 
and to give some general standards of efficiency for the use of farm 
management, extension workers, county agents, farmers, and others, 
with special reference to agricultural conditions in the South. These 
tests should be based on farm surveys, business summaries, and 
farm-practice records for the communities in which the farms consid- 
ered are located. A business summary should be prepared for each 
farm, an average summary for all the farms in the community group, 
and an average summary for a given number of the best farms in 
the group. 

With these summaries as a basis the farms should be measured 
individually, applying the tests in the order given, or in such order 
as circumstances and good judgment may suggest. In the follow- 
ing pages an exposition of these tests is given, with illustrative data 
and standards. These figures are based on prewar records and con- 
ditions, but it is believed that the principles involved will not be 
changed by war prices and costs. 

FAMILY AND FARM SUPPLIES. 

1 . Is the farm producing such of the family foods as are 
adapted to local conditions in ample quantities for the welfare 
of the family 9 

The value of the family living furnished directly from the farm 
is one of the important factors determining the amount of the income 
of the farm and the degree to which the farm business is safe and 
profitable. This is especially true of the smaller farms. 

3 



4 Department Circular 83, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. 

The garden and live stock which supply the larger part of the 
family food are usually cared for at times that interfere compar- 
atively little with the regular farm commercial enterprises, and 
by labor which otherwise would not be utilized. Further, it has 
been found that, up to a considerable size of farm business, when 
the family food is produced on the farm, this item, pi as the fuel 
and shelter furnished by the farm, amounts to an equivalent of the 
rent for the entire farm or interest on the whole farm investment. 

As an illustration, in a community in Brooks County, Ga., that 
makes a specialty of producing its own farm food and farm feeds, 
the families on 106 farms consumed in 1914 food ranging in value 
per family from $104 to $1,283 and averaging $526. Approximately 
85 per cent of this food was produced on the farms where the food 
was consumed. On farms having less than 75 acres of crop land, 
the part of the food produced on the farm amounted in value on 
an average to 48 per cent of the net income; and on farms having 
250 acres or more of crop land the part of the food produced on the 
farm similarly amounted to 18 per cent of the net income. (See U. 
S. Department of Agriculture Bulletin 648.) 

On 149 farms pretty evenly distributed in Gaston County, N. C, 
Troup County, Ga., and McLennan County, Tex., the average family 
consumed food to the value of $454. Sixty-nine per cent of this food 
was produced on the farm. 

Table I, taken from Farmers' Bulletin 1015, ''Producing family 
and farm supplies on the cotton farm," presents the kind and quan- 
tity of farm foods consumed annually by the average adult person on 
the 255 farms mentioned in the two preceding paragraphs; two 
children of 12 years or under being considered equivalent to one 
adult : 

Table I.— Average annval consumption of various articles of food per adult person by 
250 farm families in North Carolina, Georgia, and Texas. 



Article. 



Vegetables: 

Beans pecks. 

Beets do. . . 

Cabbages head. 

Cucumbers pecks. 

Melons number. 

Onions pecks. 

Peas do... 

Potatoes (Irish) bush. 

Potatoes (sweet) do. . . 

Sweet corn doz. 

Tomatoes pecks . 

Turnips do. . . 

Fruit: 

Apples bush. 

Pears do. . . 

Peaches do. . . 

Grapes do . . . 

Berries qts. 



Amount 
con- 
sumed 
per 
adult 
person. 



5.7 

3.5 
14 

2 
15 

1.5 

1.13 

2 

5.11 

6.8 

4.1 

4.5 

1.4 
.3 

1.5 
.25 
11.5 



Article. 



Cereals: 

Com meal lbs. 

Flour do. . . 

Sirups galls. 

Sugar 54 pounds= sirup galls . 

Dairy products: 

Butter ) 

Buttermilky=milk qts. 

Milk ) 

Beef lbs. 

Pork and lard do. . . 

Poultry products: 

Poultry lbs . 

Eggs doz . 



Amomit 
con- 
sumed 
per 
adult 
person. 



156 
224 

4 

8.2 



12 
138 



57.5 
28.4 



Testing Farms in the South for Efficiencij. 5 

Until similar standards can be worked out for a given community, 
Table I may be used as an aid in determining the approximate amount 
of foods to be provided for any given farm family, the number of 
farm animals needed to produce the animal products, and the amount 
of land needed for growing the plant products. The weU-managed 
farm will be planned for producing for home consumption garden 
vegetables and fruits, cereals, sirup, dairy and poultry products, 
and meat. 

Farmers' Bulletin 1015 suggests for an average family of five adult 
persons, or their equivalent, a vegetable garden of two- thirds of an 
acre, a fruit garden of one-half acre, one-third of an acre for a winter 
supply of white potatoes, one-half acre for late sweet potatoes, one- 
half acre of sugar cane for sirup and sugar, and 1 acre of corn for corn 
meal. These items make up a total of 3^ acres for plant products. 

2. Is the farm "producing the necessary feeds for the proper 
feeding of (a) the family live stoclc, (b) the farm worlc stock, and 
(c) the commercial live stocJc of the farm., as far as they can he 
produced econonfiically under local conditions? 

Farm management studies in the Southern States indicate that the 
most profitable farms not only produce the necessary farm feeds, but 
have a surplus of them to sell; and that usually on the farms pro- 
ducing a surplus the live stock is of better quality and is better cared 
for than on farms where staple feeds are bought. 

FEED FOR FAMILY LIVE STOCK. 

In Farmers' Bulletin 1015, a plan is suggested for providing the 
average farm family with animal food products, according to which 
there should be kept 2 cows, 40 fowls for furnishing eggs and poultry 
meat, and for each adult person or equivalent one pig should be 
raised annually. Enough calves should be raised to replace each 
cow reaching the age of 8 years. It is calculated that this family live 
stock will require 1 ton of corn and cob meal, 1,234 pounds of cotton- 
seed meal, 55 bushels of corn, 40 bushels of oats, 4,200 pounds of 
cowpea hay, 2,100 pounds of oat hay, 4,200 pounds of corn roughage, 
green forage from 2 acres, and 5 acres of pasture or their equivalent. 
At average yields for the cotton region these products will require 
5 J acres of corn, 3 J of oats and oat hay, and 2 acres of soiling crops, 
making a total of 10 acres of crop land, besides the 5 acres of pasture. 

FEED FOR WORK STOCK. 

The work stock in the South is usually fed on grain and dry rough- 
age during the fall, winter, and early spring. During the rest of the 
year this is supplemented on many farms by pasture and green feed, 
such as rye, sorghum, and corn. A fair provision per head of work 
stock would be 60 bushels of corn, 40 bushels of oats, and 3 tons of 



6 Department Circular 83, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. 

roughage; the last item may consist of 1^ tons of cowpea hay or 
velvet-bean hay, 1 ton of oat straw and one-half ton of corn roughage. 
To provide this feed at average yields will require 3J. acres of corn, 
2 of oats, 2 of cowpea hay, and 1 of pasture and green feed. (See 
Farmers' Bulletin 1015.) 

The feeds above suggested for the family live stock and the work 
stock are not necessarily the best for all farms and all conditions. 
They are good staple feeds and are suggested as illustrating the 
procedure in applying this farm test. Other feeds may be substituted, 
according to the judgment of the person making the test or planning 
the farm organization. 

ACRES NEEDED TO SUPPORT A 2-MULE FAMILY FARM. 

On the basis of feeding suggested and at average yields per acre 
for the South the following acreages of food and feed crops will be 
required to feed properly a 2-mule family farm, averaging five adult 
persons or their equivalent. 

Table II.- — Acres needed to support a 2 -Tnule family farm. 
[Figures in parentheses are for by-products or second crops.] 



Item. 


Gar- 
den. 


Sugar 
cane. 


Corn 
with 

cow- 
peas. 


Corn 
rough- 
age. 


Oats 
and 
oat 
hay. 


Cow- 
peas 
or 
velvet 
beans. 


Soil- 
ing 
crops. 


Cot- 
ton 
seed. 


Pas- 
ture. 


Vegetables 


! 


















White potatoes . 


















Sweet potatoes 


















Fruit 


















Meal for family 




i 














Sirup 




i 














Cows (2) 




2 
2 


(9) 


1^ 
2 


(3) 


2 


(6i) 


5 


Chickens (40) 








Hogs (5). . . 












(5) 


Work stock (2) 






(44) 


4 


(4) 






2 














Total 


2 


h 


13i 


(13J) 


7^ 


(7) 


2 


(61) 


7 







Omitting by-products and second crops, the above-tabulated 
acreage requirements total 25^ acres of crop land and 7 acres of 
pasture, or 12| acres of crop land and 3^ acres of pasture per mule 
for the 2-mule farm. A second crop is taken from 7 of the crop 
acres, and cowpeas or peanuts should be planted between the corn 
rows. These requirements are intended as a liberal provision for 
the family feed and for food for the farm live stock. In addition, 
there should be a surplus of garden stuff and dairy and poultry 
products to sell or exchange for groceries. 

The foregoing acreages are calculated on the basis of average 
yields, which have been used by way of illustration. Many farms 
produce better yields than these, and those with average or less- 
than-average yields should better them. With higher yields the 
acreages above estimated can be reduced, or they can be maintained 
and a larger surplus sold. 



Testing Farms in the South for Efficiency. 7 

COMMERCIAL ENTERPRISES. 

3. Aside from providing for its own needs, are the crops and 
live stock the farm, is producing for sale to the nonproducers of 
the community, or for export to other communities, such as 
can he made profitdble when produced and sold locally or ex- 
ported f 

The best guide here is the practice of the community; enterprises 
should be adopted that are found generally on its farms. In most 
parts of the South cotton is the staple crop, but a limited demand 
from the nonproducers of the community for some product not gen- 
erally grown locally, and for which many local farms are not adapted, 
will sometimes afford a few farms opportunity for expansion. 

For instance, the plan suggested for providing dairy products 
if followed generally, should produce surplus calves that will be help- 
ful in developing here and there cattle-raising and cattle-feeding farms. 
Some farms will be specially adapted to this purpose by having an 
abundance of suitable but unsalable by-products, cheap pasture, or 
pasture land unadapted to cropping. Other farms may develop a con- 
siderable business in the production of pork, or of pigs for supplying 
farms where brood sows are not kept. An occasional farmer will 
develop a business of producing seeds of some particular farm crop or 
crops to meet the needs of those lacking suitable skill and experience 
for such production. Outside communities may need some product 
like pork, sirup, fruit, or truck, which, because of climatic or other 
limitations, they can not produce, but which can be provided by the 
local community. Such enterprises should be taken up gradually 
and after full investigation as to their economic value. 

YIELDS PER ACRE. 

4. Are the yields per acre of the farm crops satisfactory f 
Are they high enough to make the best possible returns for cap- 
ital and labor expended in producing themf 

Farm-management studies indicate that on farms of the same 
type and size higher yields per acre are usually accompanied by 
larger net incomes, and lower yields by lower net incomes. 

In a group of 110 farms in Anderson County, S. C, cotton on 
farms yielding less than 240 pounds per acre, selling at 11 J cents 
per pound in 1914, did not pay the cost of production; that is, did 
not pay current expenses for the crop and give a fair return for the 
time and labor spent on the crop and a fair rent for the land used in 
growing the crop. On the farms that averaged a higher yield than 
one-half bale per acre the cost of production receded on an average 
practically 1 cent per pound for every 60 pounds increase in yield 
per acre. (See Department of Agriculture Bulletin 651. A Farm 
Management Study in Anderson County, S. C.) 



8 Department Circular 83, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. 

In a group of 24 farms of 50 acres or less of crop land worked by 
their owners in Sumter County, Ga., in 1913, 13 farms, having cotton 
yields of 250 pounds or less per acre, had an average farm income of 
$210, a poor return for the use of the land and the farmer's time 
and labor; while 11, with yields of cotton of over 250 pounds per 
acre, had an average farm income of $348 (Table III). 

In another group of 41 farms in the same county (Table III), 
ranging in size from 51 to 100 acres of crop land, 15 farms having 
yields of 250 pounds or less of cotton per acre had an average farm 
income of $447, while 26 in the same group with yields of cotton 
above 250 pounds had an average farm income of $728. 

In another group of 39 farms (Table III) ranging in size from 
101 to 150 acres of crop land, 1 1 farms having a cotton yield of 250 
pounds per acre or less received an average farm income of $676, 
while 28 with yields above 250 pounds per acre had an average farm 
income of $1,306. 

In still another group of 31 farms ranging in size from 151 to 250 
acres of crop land 11 farms with cotton yields of 250 pounds or less 
per acre had an average farm income of $1,379, while 20 with yields 
above 250 pounds had an average farm income of $2,326. 

These data are presented in Table III, together with some related 
factors. 

Table III. — Average farm incomes on/arms in Sumter County, Ga., having cotton yields 
of 250 pounds and under per acre andfarm,s having cotton yields of over 250 pounds."- 



Size groups and yields per acre. 


Number 
of farms. 


Average 
yield 
cotton 

per acre. 


Average 

farm 
income. 


Average 
crop 
land. 


Average 
crop 

land per 
mule. 


Average 
percent- 
ages of 
crop 
land in 
cotton. 


Farms of 50 acres and less of crop land: 


13 
11 

15 
26 

11 

28 

11 

20 


Lhs. 
202 
255 

216 
324 

213 
313 

208 
353 


$210 
348 

447 

728 

676 
1,306 

1,379 
2,626 


Acres. 
38 
29 

72 
74 

121 
121 

197 
197 


Acres. 
23 
21 

21 
25 

27 
27 

30 
27 


46 




46 


Farms of 51 to 100 acres of crop land: 


48 




48 


Farms of 101 to 150 acres of crop land: 
250 pounds cotton and less 


54 


Over 250 pounds cotton 


53 


Farms of 150 to 250 acres of crop land: 

250 pounds cotton and less 


58 




56 







a U. S. Dept. of Agriculture Bull. 492. 

In the group of small farms averaging 29 acres of crop, an average 
yield of 355 pounds of cotton is required per acre to make an average 
farm income barely sufEcient to pay a fair rental for the use of the 
land and give the operator ordinary wages for his labor and manage- 
ment in addition to supplies furnished the family from the farm, 
which are not included in the farm income in this table. Not until 
we reach the group with an average of 121 crop acres do we find that 



Testing Farms in the South for Efficiency. 9 

an average yield of less than 215 pounds of cotton per acre made an 
average farm income sufficient for rent and farmer's wages. 

It will be noted that within the size groupings the acres of crop 
land, acres of crop land per mule, and percentages of crop land in 
cotton practically counterbalance; the influence of these factors is 
therefore eliminated from the figures showing influence of yields. 

In Brooks County, Ga., the best-paying 25 farms of all sizes in a 
group of 110 farms yielded an average of over 315 pounds of cotton 
per acre, while average yields of less than 200 pounds per acre did 
not pay the cost of production. 

In Anderson County, S. C, it was foimd that the influence of yield 
on cost of production was just as marked with corn as it is with cot- 
ton, and that under prewar conditions corn did not pay cost of pro- 
duction when yields averaged less than 17 bushels per acre (U. S. 
Department of Agriculture Bulletin 651). In Brooks County, Ga., 
it was found that corn did not pay a margin over cost of production 
with yields under 18 bushels (U. S. Department of Agriculture 
Bulletin 648). 

In all parts of the cotton country where similar studies have been 
made, not only with cotton and corn, but with other crops, the find- 
ings teach the principle that the general tendency is for the cost per 
bushel and per pound to grow less and the net income of the farm to 
grow greater as the number of bushels or pounds per acre increases. 

5. Is the farm maJcing special efforts toward the use of avail- 
able farm manures, including the planting and growth of 
summer and winter catch and cover crops of small grains or 
legumes between the rows of cotton, corn, or other intertilled 
crops and on open fields and idle land to conserve and improve 
the fertility of the soil and thereby increase the yields of the 
succeeding crops f 

6. Are the varieties of the crops grown on the farm the best 
varieties for large yields and profitable production under the 
existing conditions f Is special attention paid to the selection 
and care and testing of farm seeds, having in view perfect stands 
and large yields? 

7. Are the methods of soil preparation and the cultivation 
and handling of crops in accordance with the best Tcnown prac- 
tices for the region, and are they adequate for the most profitable 
production? 

8. Is the farm making judicious use of commercial fertilizers 
in accordance with the best known practice for tlie region? 

The State college of agriculture and the experiment stations should 
be consulted as to the best crop varieties, the best methods of select- 
ing and caring for seeds, and the best tillage and fertilizer practice for 
the community. 

] 55903°— 20 2 



10 Department Circular 83, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. 
QUALITY OF LIVE STOCK. 

9. Is the quality of the farm, live stock satisfactory? 

This test has reference to the family live stock as well as to the work 
stock and stock kept expressly for commercial purposes. 

It does not pay to grow low-grade or scrub stock of any kind; and 
there is room for improvement along this line on most cotton farms. 

We have no records of the influence of production per head of live 
stock on farm income in the cotton States, but in a survey made in 
Chester County, Pa., on 289 commercial dairy farms, it was found 
that the 48 farms receiving $50 and less income per cow had labor 
incomes 45 per cent below the general average, while 28 farms with 
receipts per cow of more than $120 had labor incomes 75 per cent 
above the average and were the most profitable of the group. (U. S. 
Department of Agriculture Bulletin 341.) 

10. Is the management of the live stock on the farrn, both 
productive stoclc and worTc stocTc, in accordance with the hest 
known practice for the region f 

Farmers' Bulletins 743, "Feeding of dairy cows;" 528, "Hints to 
poultry raisers;" and 874, "Swine management," will be useful in 
this connection. It will be well also to consult the college of agri- 
culture and experiment stations for advice on the kinds, breeds, and 
care of live stock suited to the region. 

11. Aside from the family live stock and the work stock, is 
the farm carrying enough productive stock to consume surplus 
pasture and unsalable crop hy-products and convert them into 
profitable form ? 

ORGANIZATION OF THE CROP LAND. 

12. Are the crop acreages of the farm adjusted to each other 
for highly profitable production? 

The efficient adjustment or organization of the crop land will 
depend on (a) the acreage necessary to supply the family and farm 
needs; (&) the economic importance of enterprises adapted to the 
region, particularly as to market demand and the relation of prices 
to costs of production and marketing; (c) the seasonal labor require- 
ments of the enterprises; {d) the supply of labor and its cost; (e) the 
fertility of the soil; (/) the topography of the farm; {g) the size of 
the farm. 

In the Southern States cotton is the predominating market crop, 
because of its adaptability to soil, climate, and labor conditions and 
to the great demand for it in regions where it can not be produced. 
Hence, in those parts of the cotton belt where the menace of the boll 



Testing Farms in the South for Efficiency. n 

weevil and shortage of labor are not severe, and with the exception of 
special localities where the competition of other enterprises is strong, 
the procedure in testing the organization of the crop land should be 
as follows: 

Has the farmer set aside sufficient acreage to provide well for the 
family and farm foods and feeds ? Part of the crops grown for these 
purposes should be legumes for enriching the ration and improving 
fertility. (Consult Farmers' Bulletin 1015.) 

After providing for family and farm supplies, has the farmer set 
aside for cotton as many acres as can be cared for properly and har- 
vested with the available farm equipment and such outside assist- 
ance as can be relied upon? 

After providing for farm needs, xucluding fertility, and for such 
acreage of cotton as can be cared for well, has the remainder of the 
land, if there is any, been devoted to other enterprises in the order 
of their importance? Such enterprises are: Increasing the acreage of 
food and feed crops for sale or for extending the productive live-stock 
enterprises; adding some other commercial enterprise, such as 
peanuts, or soy beans, for feed or oil; or some more intensive enter- 
prise like sirup making or truck growing. But these added enter- 
prises must not seriously compete with the cotton in its labor require- 
ments or tend to diminish the fertility of the soil. 

As a guide in testing the cropping system until local standards 
can be worked out, we may take as general standards the records 
from some surveys that have been made in the cotton country. 

In the Sumter County, Ga., survey, previously referred to (U. S. 
Dept. of Agriculture Bulletin 492), there were nine 1-mule cotton 
farms operated by white owners; the best five of them averaged 23 
acres of crop land per mule. Of this, 9.8 acres, or less than half, 
was planted to cotton. The remainder was divided as follows: 7.2 
acres in corn, 2.7 in oats or oat hay, 3.6 were second-cropped with 
cowpea hay, leaving 3.3 acres for miscellaneous purposes. (See 
Table IV.) 

Of twenty-three 2-mule farms the best five averaged 30.2 acres of 
crop land per mule. Of this, 10.6 acres were planted to corn, 3.9 
to oats and oat hay, 2 acres were second-cropped with cowpea 
hay, 14 acres were devoted to cotton, and 1,7 to miscellaneous crops 
(Table IV). 

Of twenty-five 3-mule farms the best five averaged 32.58 acres of 
crop land per mule, of which 17.47 acres were planted to cotton, the 
remainder going largely into food and feed crops (Table IV). 

Of eighteen 4-mule farms the best five averaged 30 acres of crop 
land per mule; 18.85 of this went into cotton, the remainder being 
planted to supply crops (Table IV). 



12 Department Circular 83, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. 

Of nineteen 5-mule farms the best five averaged 27.1 acres per 
mule and planted 15| of this in cotton (Table IV). 

The best five of fifteen 6-mule farms averaged 34J acres of crop 
land per mule and planted 19 J acres of this in cotton (Table IV). 

Table IV gives the average organization per mule of the crop land 
for each group of five best farms and averages for the six groups. 
These best farms grade high in acres per mule, yields, organization, 
and resulting income. 

Table IV. — Organization of crop land per mule on 30 cotton farms in a group of 109 farms 
in Sumter County, Ga. ( U. S. Department of Agriculture Bulletin 492.) 





Averages acres of — 


Aver- 
age 

total 

acres 
of 

crops 
per 

mule. 


Pro- 
duc- 
tive 

work- 
days 
on 

crops 
per 

mule. 


Aver- 


Farm groups." 


Cotton 

per 

mule. 


Corn 

per 

mule. 


Oats 
and 
oat 
hay 
per 
mule. 


Cow- 
pea 

hayb 
per 

mule. 


Mis- 
cella- 
neous 
crops 

per 
mule. 


age 
farm 

in- 
come 

per 
mule. 


Best five l-mule farms 


9.8 
14 

17.47 
18.85 
15.5 
19.5 


7.2 
10.6 
11.8 
8.5 
8.1 
9.83 


2.7 

3.9 

1.6 

1.73 

1.9 

3.66 


3.6 

2 

2 

""i.'32' 
2.45 


3.3 

1.7 

1.71 

1.05 

1.18 

1.56 


26.6 

32.2 

34.58 

30.08 

28 

37 


98 
133 
147 
145 
124 
161 


$419 


Best five 2-mule farms 


353 


Best five 3-mule farms 


430 


Best five 4-mule farms 


458 


Best five 5-mule farms 


330 


Best five 6-mule farms 


380 






Average for 30 farms 


15.85 


9.33 


2.58 


1.90 


1.81 


31.41 


135 


395 







a Selected on the basis of farm income. Same groups as in Tables V, X, and XIX. 
6 The cowpea hay is second crop, grown after oats or some other early crop. 

By referring back to Table II it will be seen that apparently only 
one of the groups of best farms, that of the l-mule farms, came near 
the standard set for providing for the family and farm needs. Most 
of the farms represented in the table could probably be made more 
efficient along these lines. 

Some additional facts as to tilled acres per farm and per mule, 
per cent of land in cotton, yields of cotton and corn per acre, and 
the farm income are given in Table V. 

Tablk V. — Average of total tilled acres, tilled acres per mule, per cent of land in cotton, 
yields of cotton and corn, farm income per mule, and total farm income, for 30 farins in 
Sumter County, Ga. ( tl. S. Department of Agriculture Bulletin 492.) 



Farm groups." 


Aver- 
age 
total 
tilled 
acres 
per 
farm. 


Aver- 
age 

tilled 

acres 
per 

mule. 


Aver- 
age 
per 
cent 
of land 
in cot- 
ton. 


Aver- 
age 
yield 
per 
acre 
of cot- 
ton. 


Aver- 
age 

yield 

per 

acre 

of 

com. 


Aver- 
age 
farm 
in- 
come 
per 
mule. 


Aver- 
age 
total 
farm 
in- 
come. 


Best five l-mule farms 


23 
60.4 
97.75 
120.3 
133.4 
207.3 


23 

30.2 

32.58 

30 

26.68 

34.55 


44.3 

45.7 

54.16 

61.46 

58.3 

56.7 


Lhs. 
311 
298 
304 
321 
298 
284 


Bush. 
28.1 
15.7 
13.8 
14.6 
12 
16.6 


$479 
353 
430 
458 
330 
380 


$4ie 


Best five 2-mule farms 


705 


Best five 3-mule farms 


1,291 


Best five 4-mule farms 


1,833 


Best five 5-mule farms. . . . • 


1,650 


Best five 6-mule farms 


2,283 




Average for 30 farms. . 




29.58 


53.44 


302.7 


16.8 


405 















a Same groups as in Tables IV, X, and XIX selected on basis of farm income from a group of 109 farms. 



Testing Farms in the South for Efficiency. 



13 



The difference between tilled acres per mule in this table and acres 
of crops per mule in Table IV is the amount of land that was cropped 
a second time, and amounts here to the acreage in cowpeas after oats. 
Cowpeas planted between the rows of corn are not included in this 
second-crop acreage. 

In Brooks County, Ga., a study was made on an area of light sandy 
loam (U. S. Department of Agriculture Bulletin 648). In order to 
obtain profitable yields on this light soil, it was necessary to pay 
particular attention to the maintenance of soil fertility, and a system 
was developed which gives a smaller relative acreage to cotton and 
pays particular attention to legume crops and hogs. The hogs graze 
on wild pasture and winter grain, doing considerable harvesting of 
the corn and peanuts and gleaning other crop fields. Table VI 
gives the organization of the crop land for farm groups similar to 
those treated in Tables IV and V. 



Table Y1.— Organization of crop land per mule on SO farms in a group of 85 farms in 
Brooks County, Ga. {U. S. Department of Agriculture Bulletin 648.) 





Average acres of— 


Aver- 


Farm groups, a 


Cot- 
ton 
per 
mule. 


Com 

per 

mule. 


Pea- 
nuts 

In 
com 

per 
mule. 


Pea- 
nuts 
per 
mule. 


Oats 
and 
rye 
per 
mule. 


Cow- 
pea 
hay 
per 
mule. 


Mis- 
cel- 
lane- 
ous 

crops 
per 

mule. 


Crops 

per 

mule. 


age 
days' 
work 

on 
crops 

per 
mule. 


Best five 1-mule farms 

Best five 2-mule farms 

Best five 3-mule farms 

Best five 4-mule farms 

Best five 5-mule farms 

Best five 6-mule farms 


8.9 
8.1 
12.13 
6.55 
9.10 
6.73 


13.8 

15.5 

11.2 

15.85 

13.34 

11.48 


13.4 
15.4 
7.2 
12.9 
8.1 
6.53 


"'"i."5"" 
1.73 
3.5 

.76 
4.73 


1.2 
2.25 

7.27 
6.3 
7.7 
6.46 


0.8 

2.05 

7.07 

3.85 

3.86 

4.53 


1.83 
4.42 
3.00 
4.31 
4.66 
4.05 


26.53 
33.82 
42.40 
40.36 
39.38 
37.98 


97 
125 
134 
125 
132 
119 


Average for 30 farms . . 


8.57 


13.53 


10.59 


2.04 


5.20 


3.69 


3.71 


36.74 


122.3 



a Selected on the basis of farm income. Same groups as in Tables VII, XI, and XX. 

For each mule these farms carried an average equivalent of three 
mature cattle, including dairy stock and sixteen 200-pound hogs 
including two brood sows. It will be noticed that cotton has been 
reduced to about one-half the acreage on the Sumter County farms, 
and that corn, peanuts, hogs, and miscellaneous crops have taken a 
more prominent place. 

Further facts relative to these Brooks County farms are given 
in Table VII. Among the important miscellaneous crops were 
watermelons, sweet potatoes, Irish potatoes, and sugar cane. 



14 Depavlment Circular S3, (J. S. Depl. of Agriculture. 

Table VII. — Averages of total tilled acres per far ra, tilled acres per mule, percentage oj 
tilled land in cotton and com, yields of cotton and com, number of hogs, and net income 
on groups of farms in Brooks County, Ga. ( U. S. Department of Agriculture Bul- 
letin 648.) 









Aver- 


Aver- 






Aver- 








Aver- 


. 


age 


age 


Aver- 


Aver- 


age 




Aver- 




age 




per 


per 


age 


age 


eqmv- 


age 


age 




total 


tilled 

acres 


cent 


cent 


yields 


yields 


alent 


net 


Farm groups. i 


tilled 
acres 


of 
tilled 


of 

tilled 


of 
cotton 


of 

corn 


of ma- 
ture 


income 
per 


in- 
come 




per 


mule. 


acres 


acres 


per 


per 


hogs 


per 




farm. 


in cot- 


m 


acre. 


acre. 


per 




farm.i' 








ton. 


corn. 






mule. 
















Lbs. 


Bush. 








Best five 1-mulef arms 


25.33 


25.33 


35.92 


53.34 


300 


12 


10.6 


S577 


$577 


Best five 2-mule farms 


65.7 


32.87 


27.51 


45.51 


318 


15 


18.5 


555 


1,112 


Best five 3-mule farms 


109.1 


36.29 


33. 89 


31.27 


302 


14 


17.8 




1,742 


Best five 4- mule farms 


144.6 


36.15 


17.9 


43.67 


324 


14 


17.3 


514 


2,056 


Best five 5-mule farms 

Best five 6-mule farms 


17.^. 8 
199. 2 


33.16 
33.2 


28.32 
20.74 


37.58 
34.73 


299 
323 


13 
14 


14.8 
17 


490 

427 


2,488 
2,561 






32.83 


27.4 


41.0 


311 


13.7 


16 


524 











o Selected on the basis of farm income from a group of 85 farms, same groups as in Tables VI, XI, and XX. 
b Net income includes what the farm furnished the family. 

LABOR UTILIZATION. 

13. Are the labor requirements of the productive enterprises 
of the farm as organized sufficient to maJce the test utilization 
of the worlc-stocTc equipment necessary to operate the farm? 

As a measure for this test, we may use the experiences of the more 
successful farms of the tj^pe in the community. 

For example, turning back to Tables IV and V, we find that on the 
best 1-mule farms in the Sumter County community an average of 27 
acres of crops on 23 acres of crop land were worked with one mule. 
Therefore we should expect that the mtde requirements on farms of 
this type that have less than 23 acres of tilled land or 27 acres of 
crops are not sufficient to utihze properly the labor of the one mule 
necessary to operate the farm. 

Likewise, on the best 2-mule farms of the community, 60 acres of 
crop land and 64 acres of crops were worked with a 2-mule equip- 
ment, and we should expect that the mule-labor requirements on 
farms of this type that have less than 60 acres of crop land or 64 acres 
of crops are not sufficient to utilize properly the labor of a 2-mule 
farm. 

By the same reasoning we should expect that the labor require- 
ments of a farm of this type of less than 98 acres of crop land, or 104 
acres of crops, would not be sufficient to use, the labor of three mules 
with the best efficiency, and so on, with the larger mule equipments. 

For farms of the Brooks County type, as shown in Tables YI and 
VII, anything smaller than 25 acres of crop land or 26^ acres of crops 
for a 1-mule farm, 66 tilled acres for a 2-mule farm, 109 acres of crop 



\' 



' Teslinii Farms in the Soiitli for Efficiency. 15 

land or 127 acres of crops for a 3-mule farm would not have labor re- 
quirements sufficient to utilize properly the work-stock equipment 
necessary to operate them. 

While these figures represent the averages of the best farms in the 
various groups, and make an excellent and conservative guide, they 
do not represent the highest possible efficiency. For instance, in the 
group of the five best 3-mule farms in Sumter County, there was one 
farm on which each mule worked an average of 20 acres of cotton, 
16f acres of corn, IJ acres of oats, followed by IJ acres of cowpea 
hay, and 1.41 acres of miscellaneous crops, or a total of 40.71 acres 
of crops per mule, and each mule worked an average of 187 days, 
which is a very good average, considering that there are about 230 
days in the year available for crop work in this region. 

With a cotton yield of 290 pounds per acre, the farm income of 
this farm was $632 per mule, or $1,896 for the 3-mule farm. 

If it is found that the labor requirements of the farm are not suffi- 
cient to reach high efficiency in utilizing the available time of the 
work-stock equipment necessary to operate the farm, is it possible to 
bring into use idle tillable land, to reclaim wild land, or to rent addi- 
tional land and thus increase the efficiency of the farm labor and 
equipment ? 

14. Is the present equipment of work stocl' sufficient to 
operate the farm efficiently? 

As a measure for this test, we may again use Tables IV, V, VI, and 
VII, or similar tables compiled for the community in which the farm 
is located. 

If it is found that the work-stock equipment is not sufficient to 
operate the farm properly, is it possible to add more work stock or 
by renting out a few acres bring the farm to a size that can be oper- 
ated efficiently by the present outfit ? 

15. Are the man-lahor requirements of the productive enter- 
prises of the farm as organized sufficient to m,aJce the best utili- 
zation of the time of the regular men necessary to operate the 
farm? 

As a basis for this test we may use the experience of the best farms 
of the community. For illustration and general standards we may 
take the Simiter and Brooks County, Ga., groups of best farms. 

On the southern farms one or more men are occupied regularly 
in management, and work the entire year. Other laborers or members 
of the family are employed to work by the acre, by the hundred- 
weight of crop, or by the day, at such work as chopping and hoeing, 
picking cotton, or other miscellaneous work, and are paid for the 
actual time employed. 



16 Department Circular S3, U . S. Dept. of Agriculture. 

AVAILABLE DAYS. 

If from the total number of days in each month we deduct Sundays' 
holidays, rainy days, and other days not suited for field work, we get a 
set of numbers which represent approximately the days in each 
month that are available for field work on the farm. The sums of 
these numbers will be the total number of days available for field work 
during the year. 

If wo add together the number of available days for each regular 
man on the farm for the time he is employed we will have the total 
time available for regular field work. For example, the following 
days per month were found to be available for field work in Sumter 
County, Ga. 

Table VIII. — Days available for field vjork per month in central Georgia. 



Months. 


as 

1-5 


1 




i 

< 


S- 

S 


1 


t 


< 


a 

ft 


O 


1 


1 
ft 


"3 
1 


Days available 


16 


15 


19 


19 


21 


20 


21 


21 


20 


20 


20 


18 


230 



A man working the entire year will be able to work in the field 
230 days, provided there is sufficient work to keep him busy, and 
a man working seven months, from January 1 to July 31, will be 
able to work in the field 132 days, if that much work is provided for 
him. 

Table IX gives the same data for communities in southern Georgia : 

Table IX.— Days available for field work per month in southern Georgia. 



Months. 


3 


1 


.4 


t 

< 


^ 

s 


1 


l-s 


a 
< 


a 
® 

5" 


si 

o 
O 


S 
1 


si 

1 
S 


3 

o 

EH 


Days available 


18 


18 


20 


22 


21 


20 


20 


21 


22 


22 


22 


19 


245 



One man working the entire year and two men working six months 
each from January 1 would be able to do a total of 483 days of field 
work, an average of 161 days per man, provided there was that 
much work to be done. 

WORK DAYS REQUIRED. 

If on a given farm we find the number of days necessary to do the 
contract and miscellaneous day wage work and subtract the amount 
from the total number of days' work required by aU the productive 
enterprises, the remainder wiD be the number of productive days' 
work required of the regular men of the farm. 



Testing Farms in the South for Efficiency. 



17 



If we divide this number of productive days' work required of 
the regular men of the farm by the number of days available for 
field work at their command, we will get a number expressing the 
percentage of efficiency with which their time has been utilized. 

For example, the group of five best 4-mule farms in the Sumter 
County community (see Tables IV, V, and X) has an average of 4.8 
regular men per farm. These men had a total of 1,016 days available 
for field work. There was a total of 1,184 days' work required by 
the productive enterprises. Of these, 512 were cared for by contract 
and miscellaneous hired and family labor, leaving 671 days for the 
regular men. This means 212 days available per regular man, of 
which 140 days, or 66 per cent, were required for and utilized on 
productive enterprises. 

UTILIZATION OF MAN LABOR. 

Table X gives the average number of men, the days available per 
regular man, the number of days' work required per regular man on 
productive enterprises, and the per cent of the time utilized on the 
groups of best farms in the Sumter County community. 

Table X. — Utilization of regular man labor on groups of farms in Sumter County, Gd. 
( U. S. Department of Agriculture Bulletin 492.) 

[Average figures.] 





Regular 
men per 
farm. 'f 


Days per regular man. 


Per cent of 
available 
time used 
on pro- 
ductive 
enterprises. 


Farm groups, a 


Available 
for field 
work. 


Work on 
productive 
enterprises 
required, c 


Best five 1-mule farms 


Men. 
1.2 
2.4 
4.2 

4.8 
5 

7 


Days. Days. 

218 94 
217 115 


Per cent. 
43 


Best five 2-mule farms 


53 


Best five 3-mule farms 


177 
212 
205 
192 


118 
140 
135 
143 


67 


Best five 4-mu]e farms 


66 


Best five 5-mule farms 


65 


Best five 6-mule farms 


74 










204 


124 


61.3 









a Selected from 109 farms on the basis of farm income. Same groups as in tables IV, V, and XIX. 

6 Operators, croppers, and men employed by the month for a whole or part of the year. Two hundred 
and thirty days in the year are available for field work for a man on the farm the entire year. 

c This figure is found by deducting cotton picking and other contract and miscellaneous family and 
hired labor performed on the enterprises from the total man-labor requirements of the enterprise and divid- 
ing the remainder by the number of regular men. 

Table XI gives the same facts for the groups of best Brooks 
County farms. 



18 Department Circular 83, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. 



Table XI. — Utilization of regular man labor on groups of farms in Brooks County, Ga. 
( U. S. Department of Agriculture Bulletin 640.) 

[Average figures.] 



Farm groups, a 



Regular 

men per 

farm. 6 



Days per regular man. 



Available 
for field 
work. 



Work on 
productive 
enterprises 
required, c 



Per cent of 
available 
time used 
on pro- 
ductive 
enterprises. 



Men. 



Best five 
Best five 
Best five 
Best five 
Best five 
Best five 



1-mule farms . 
2-mule farms. 
3-mule farms . 
4-mule farms. 
5-mule farms . 
6-mule farms . 



1 

2.4 

3.4 

4.2 

5.4 

6.5 



Days. 



243 
220 
203 
170 
192 
187 



115 
144 
147 
119 
140 
136 



Per cent. 



All farms. 



202.5 



133.7 



a Selected on the basis of farm income, same groups as in Tables VI, VII, and XX. 

6 Operators, croppers, and men [employed by the month for a whole or part of the year. Two hundred 
and forty-five days in the year are available for field work for a man on the farm the entire year. 

c This figure is found by deducting cotton picking and other contract and miscellaneous family and 
hired labor performed on the enterprise from the total man-labor requirements of the enterprise and dividing 
the remainder by the number of regular men. 

These figures give us an idea of what may be expected in the 
utiUzation of regular man labor on well-organized farms like those 
considered in Tables IV and VII in the regions where those farms 
are located. 

Under test 13 (p. 14) the measures of mule labor utilization sug- 
gested are the number of acres of crop land and the number of 
acres of crops worked per mule. 

Under test 15 (p. 15) the measure of labor utilization employed 
is a percentage figure representing the relation of the total number 
of days' work required per regular man to the number of days avail- 
able for field work per regular man. 

In checking up the influence of organization on labor efficiency 
it may sometimes be desirable to compare the labor available with 
that required by months or fractions of a month throughout the 
year. Such a comparison will show in what months, if any, the 
labor is not fully utilized, and will serve as a guide in readjusting the 
acreages of the enterprises, in extending the present organization 
over more acres, or in adding other enterprises. For such monthly 
comparisons of the labor required and the labor available it will 
be necessary to determine for the individual farm or for the farm 
communities : 

First. The number of days in each month on which labor can 
usually be performed after deducting Sundays, holidays, rainy 
days, and days when the soil is not in condition to work. 

Second. The average practice in working the crops and the labor 
required per acre for the farm in question or for the region. 

Third. The distribution of this labor by months or fractions of a 
month throughout the year. 



Testing Farms in the South for Efficiency. 



19 



By way of example the above data for central Georgia are given 
in Tables XII, XIII, XIV, and XV. 

Table XII. — -Number of days available for field work per month in central Georgia. 



Months. 


1 


2 


1 

1^ 


i 

< 


^ 

s 


1 


i 


■< 


1 


O 


a 
® 

> 

o 
!z; 


1 


i 


Days available 


16 


15 


19 


19 


21 


20 


21 


21 


20 


20 


20 


18 


230 



Table XIII. — Field practice and labor requirements for som£ crops in central Georgia. 

{About 100 farms.) 



Operation. 


Sweet 
potatoes. 


Sugar 


cane. 


Sorghum. 


Com. 


Cotton. 


Man 
days. 


Horse 
days. 


Man 
days. 


Horse 
days. 

0.20 
1.28 


Man 
days. 


Horse 
days. 


Man 
days. 


Horse 
days. 


Man 
days. 


Horse 

days. 








0.10 
.59 


0.11 
.50 


0.22 
1.05 


0.11 
.50 


0.22 
1.05 


0.12 
.67 


0.24 


Break 


0.65 
.25 
.14 


1.25 


1.40 






Harrow 


.28 


.06 
.64 
.53 
.35 
1.72 
.80 


.16 
.99 
.35 

'"i.'72' 


.16 
.20 
.14 
.06 
.95 


.47 
.36 
.13 
.07 
1.18 


.16 
.20 
.14 
.06 
.95 


.47 
.36 
.13 
.07 
1.18 


.19 
.46 
.20 
.16 
1.42 
1.30 


.40 


Bed 


.53 


Fertilize 


.94 

1.50 
1.88 
1.29 


.80 
"i.'62' 


.20 


Plant 


.16 


Harrow and cultivate 


1.54 










.50 


.50 


















.93 














7.06 


.99 


























6.70 
.06 


.56 




3.00 


1.34 










.70 


,35 


.13 




3.50 
.40 


1.50 




























■"""" 
















Total 


9.65 


4.69 


15.75 


7.19 


3.62 


3.98 


3.75 


3.83 


11.28 


5.16 







Table XIV. — -Field practice and labor requirements for some crops in central Georgia. 

{About 100 farms.) 



Operation. 


Fruit 


Peanuts. 


White 
potatoes. 


Oats and 
rye. 


Cowpea 
hay. 


Man 
days. 


Horse 
days. 


Man 
days. 


Horse 
days. 


Man 

days. 


Horse 
days. 


Man 

days. 


Horse 
days. 


Man 
days. 


Horse 
days. 


Break 


0.52 


0.50 


0.60 


0.80 


0.60 


1.20 


0.59 


1.66 


0.29 
.73 
.10 


0.44 


Seed 


.03 












.20 
1.00 
.30 
.86 
1.50 
1.24 
1.00 

.25 
2.79 


.40 






.20 


















Lay ofl 






.20 


.20 


.30 
.70 
.50 
1.24 










Fertilize 


.23 


.09 


1 .25 


.09 






Plant 


.80 
.80 
1.10 


.20 

.80 









1.10 


1.52 




Hoe 












1.18 
4.89 


.75 

.92 


.25 
1.50 












a3.50 


O2.00 




















1.60 


.70 




















.40 
.31 


.30 
.23 


.22 
.37 


.35 
















.28 




.58 
.37 

.45 


.68 
.07 












Prnnft. . 


61.05 


61.30 






































Bale.. 
















.70 


.31 






















Total 


9.32 


4.53 


6.10 


2.70 


9.74 


6.09 


1.55 


2.28 


1.75 


1.61 







Total for peanuts hogged off. 



?> Total for cowpea hay not baled. 



20 Department Circular 83, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. 

Table XV. — DistribiUion by months of the average number of days of man labor and horse 
labor expendedin growing 1 acre of each of the following crops in central Georgia. (About 
lOOfarms.) 



Crops. 


1 




ja" 


P. 


& 

s 


6 

1-5 


3 


< 


1 


1 

O 


» 

a 

o 


1 

ft 


o 
Eh 


Vegetables: 

Man days.. 

Horse do 


0.50 
.39 

1.44 
1.04 

.64 
.26 


0.73 
1.01 

.44 
.42 

.39 
.75 


2.06 

1.85 

.61 
.70 


2.07 
1.45 

.29 
.18 

.97 
.62 


2.42 
1.05 

1.19 
.36 

1.78 
.55 


1.85 
.69 

3.00 
.56 

2.33 
.44 


1.84 
.90 

.99 

.18 

.57 
.29 

2.10 
1.55 

.38 
.38 

.50 
.12 


1.81 

.80 


1.77 
.63 


1.59 
.55 

.07 
.08 

.97 
.46 

.70 
.50 

2.75 
.33 


0.20 





16. 84 
9.32 


Fruit: 

Man days.. 


.54 
.60 

.75 
.36 

2.09 
1.00 

8.21 
2.16 


1.36 
1.11 

.64 
.26 

.19 

.47 

.19 

.47 


9.32 


Horse do 






4 53 


Sweet potatoes: 

Man days.. 






9 65 


Horse do 






4.69 


Late white potatoes: 


3.58 
2.27 


1.27 

.82 




Horse do 
















Sugar cane: 

Man days.. 


.43 
.93 

.20 
.42 

.20 
.42 


.64 
1.04 

.25 
.59 

.25 
.59 


.99 
.73 

.29 
.56 

.29 
.56 

.09 


.19 
.33 

.34 
.39 

.34 
.39 


1.37 
.57 

.51 
.62 

.51 

.62 

.13 
.10 


.79 
.72 

.59 
.55 

.34 
.43 

.42 
.31 

.30 
.44 

1.90 
.65 

1.05 
.57 


15 75 


Horse do 






7. 19 


Sorglium fed green: 
Man days.. 


.50 
.12 

.93 


.50 
.12 


3.62 


Horse do 






3.96 


Com: 

Man days.. 

Horse do 


.35 
.17 

.37 

.87 

.21 
.21 


.35 
.18 


3.73 
3.85 


Oats: 

Man days. . 


.16 
.12 

.16 
.23 




.38 

.88 

.38 
.42 


1.55 


Horse . . do 










2.28 


Cow peas for hay: 
Man days. . 














1.09 


Horse do 










1.60 
1.35 

1.27 

.54 






1.30 


Peanuts hogged off: 
Man days.. 






3.50 


Horse do 






















2.00 


Cotton: 

Man days.. 

Horse do 


.38 
.79 


.31 

.64 


.33 
.43 


.63 

.68 


.32 
.34 




2.11 
.18 


2.32 
.20 


2.32 
.19 


.24 
.60 


11.28 
5.16 



Witli data similar to the above in hand, a farm organization can 
be tested in detail for its efficiency in utilizing the labor of man and 
horse equipment necessary for its operation. The following example 
is given by way of illustration: 



APPLICATION TO INDIVIDUAL FARM. 

A certain farm in central Georgia has 59.5 acres of crop land, 65 
acres of permanent tillable pasture land, 10 acres occupied by build- 
ings, roads, and waste, and 178 acres of woods. The family on this 
farm consists of 5 adults and 5 children under 16 years of age, or an 
equivalent of 7| adults. 

In 1914 the live stock on this farm consisted of 2 mules, 2 cows, 6 
head of young stock, 2 brood sows, 12 pigs and shoats, 59 poultry, 
and 20 stands of bees. 

The crop land was divided as follows: I acre of garden, 1 acre of 
sweet potatoes, J acre of sugar cane, 30 acres of corn, 10 acres of oats 
and rye followed by 8 acres of cowpeas and velvet beans for hay, 4 
acres of peanuts for hogs, and 14 acres of cotton. 

Table XVI gives the mule labor available and the mule-labor re- 
quirements of these crops, by months. The first line of this table 



Testing Farms in the South for Efficiency. 



21 



gives the days of mule labor available each month from 2 miiles. 
These amounts are found by multiplying the number of days avail- 
able for field work in each month in Table XII by 2, the number of 
mules. 

Then follows the number of mule-days required each month by 
the crops of this farm on the basis of average practice for the region. 
These figures are found by multiplying the acre requirements of the 
crops for each month in Table XV by the number of acres of the 
crop grown. 

The total requirement of the 59J acres of crop land or 67^ acres 
of crop for each month is then subtracted from the labor available 
for that month, and in the last line is found the number of unused 
mule-days for each month. 

Table XVI. — Mule labor data on a farm in central Georgia. 





1 


u 






^ 
a 






3 

< 


a. 
m 


O 


S3 

i 


1 

ft 


•3 


Days of mule labor 
available from 2 


32.00 


30.00 


38.00 


38.00 


42.00 


40.00 


42.00 


42.00 


40.00 


40.00 


40.00 


36.00 


460 00 






Days of mule labor 
required by crops: 
Garden vege- 
tables, J acre... 


.10 

.26 

.23 

12.60 


.25 

.75 

.28 
17.70 


.46 

.70 

.18 

16.80 


.36 

.62 

.08 

11.70 


.26 

.55 

.14 
18.60 

1.00 


.17 

.44 

.18 

12.90 

3.10 

3.52 
2.60 
7.98 


.23 

.29 
.10 


.20 


.16 


.14 

.46 

.08 

5.10 

8.70 
1.68 






2.33 


Sweet potatoes, 
1 acre 


.36 

.54 

5.40 


.26 

ii'io' 


4.69 


Sugar cane, \ acre 






1.79 


Com, 30 acres 






114.90 


Oats and rye, 10 
acr&s. . . 


1.20 
1.84 




8.80 
3.36 


22.80 


Cowpeas and vel- 
vet-bean hay, 
8 acres 














10.40 


Peanuts , 4 acres. . 










5.40 
7.56 






8.00 


Cotton, 14 acres.. 


11.06 


8.96 


6.02 


9.52 


4.76 




2.52 


2.80 


2.66 


8.40 


72.44 


Total required (for 
crop land , 594 acres : 
acres of crops, 67^). 


24.25 


27.92 


24.16 


22.28 


33.51 


30.89 


8.42 


.20 


14.84 


18.96 


8.96 


22.76 


237.15 


Remaining mule 
labor (days) 


7.75 


2.08 


13.84 


15.72 


8.49 


9.11 


33.58 


41.80 


25.16 


21.01 


31.04 


13.24 


222.85 






23.67 




66 


90 




132.28 





This farm is working 29f acres of land per mule, on which it grows 
33f acres of crops per mule. This is considerably above the average, 
but is using only 52 per cent of the mule days available for field work. 

The available mule labor for February is pretty well used up, but 
during the three soil-preparation months of January, February, and 
March there is a surplus of 24 mule days. In the planting and culti- 
vation months there are 67 days, and during the remainder of the 
year there are 132 days not used, making a total of 223 mule days, 
or 48 per cent of the total available mule days still to be used if 
desired and conditions permit. 



22 Department Circular 83, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. 

According to the standards set up in test 1 (p. 3), this 2-mule farm, 
with a family of 7^ adults or their equivalent, should provide for 
home use 1 acre of garden vegetables, f acre of fruit, | acre of late 
white potatoes, f acre of sweet potatoes, and f acre of sugar cane. 
The record of the farm shows that there was i acre of garden, no fruit, 
1 acre of sweet potatoes, and | acre of sugar cane. 

So, by way of illustration, suppose that in the way of reorgani- 
zation we add to the crops of this farm f acre of garden vegetables, 
f acre of fruit, and J acre of white potatoes. The farm was planting 
plenty of sweet potatoes and had 20 stands of honey bees to supply 
sweets in addition to the I acre of sugar cane; therefore we will not 
increase the sweet-potato and sugar-cane area. 

The family live stock on this farm is ample for family needs, as the 
records show some butter sales from the two cows, sales of eggs from 
the flock of 59 head of poultry, and some sales of meat from the 12 
pigs and shoats on hand at the beginning of the year. According to 
approximate standards suggested imder test 2 (p. 6), this live stock 
will require the acreage of crops indicated in Table XVII. 

Table XVII. — Acreage of crops needed to feed the indicated farin live stock. 
[The parentheses indicate a second product, second crop, or double use of the land.] 



Kind of live stock. 


Com. 


Com 

rough- 
age. 


Oats 

and oat 

hay. 


Cow- 
pea 
hay. 


Soil- 
ing 
crops. 


Pas- 
ture. 


2 cows 


Acres. 
2 
3 
3 
2 

3.5 
7 
1.5 


Acres. 

(9) 

(8.5) 


Acres. 
1.5 
3.5 
3 


Acres. 
(3) 
(4) 


A cres. 
2 


Acres. 
5 




7 


69 pouRry 






2 brood sows 










12 pigs and shoats 










(14) 

•7 


2 mules 


(4.5) 


4 


(4) 




Family meal . 


















Total 


22 


(22) 


12 


(11) 


2 


14 







In the way of live-stock feed crops, the farm has planned for 30 
acres of com, 10 acres of oats and rye, 8 acres of cowpea and velvet 
bean hay and 65 acres of pasture. It has also provided 4 acres of 
peanuts for hog grazing. On the basis of the standards proposed in 
test 2, the stock requirements of this farm, as worked out in Table 
XVII, call for 2 more acres of oats, 3 more acres of cowpea hay, and 
2 acres of sorghum for green feed. There is also a surplus of 8 acres 
of com, for which other crops may be substituted, if desired. 

The mule labor required by the additional family food crops and 
live-stock feed crops needed to meet the standards given are found in 
Table XVIII (p. 24). In the first line of that table are given the 
amounts of mule labor not used, as shown in Table XVI. Then 
follow the labor requirements of the additional maintenance crops in 
lines 2 to 7. The total requirements of these crops by months in Hne 
8 are subtracted from the surplus mule labor, shown in the first 



Testing Farms in the South for Efficiency. 23 

line. The remainders in line 9 show a shortage of nearly one-fifth 
of a day in February, but there is sufficient surplus in January 
and March to take good care of this, as the work in these months is 
not definitely fixed as to time and can be shifted. 

Now, suppose we discard the surplus 8 acres of corn not needed for 
the farm feed and add the labor of these 8 acres to the mule labor 
that remains in line 9. In line 11, the totals resulting from these 
additions, will be found new monthly amounts of mule labor still 
available, and it is proposed that the most of this labor be utilized 
in growing more cotton, the principal commercial crop of the region. 

We find the smallest amount of surplus mule labor in February, 
namely, 4.54 days. This divided by 0.64 day, the mule labor 
required for 1 acre of cotton in February, as foimd in Table XV, 
would limit us to not more than 7 acres. However, the labor during 
the three preparation months of January, February, and March is 
not definitely fixed as to time, and by shifting the work we can handle 
a larger acreage. It might be possible to handle 15 acres with the 
28 days available for the three months. This number of acres might 
also possibly be taken care of in the month of June, which has the 
lowest amount of surplus mule labor in the planting and cultivation 
months. In both instances, however, we would be running on a very 
narrow margin, so we will proceed on the basis of adding 10 acres of 
cotton to use this surplus labor. 

The labor requirements of the additional 10 acres of cotton are 
found in line 12 of the table. Subtracting these amoimts from the 
available amounts in line 11, we still have a surplus of mule labor as 
shown in line 13. This surplus is largest in the last half of the year. 
It will be desirable, therefore, to add some crop that will use labor 
during the latter part of the year. Referring to Table XV, we find 
that we have such a crop for this region in late white potatoes, and 
it is proposed that we add 3^ acres of this crop. Also, as this crop 
occupies the ground only in the latter part of the year, it will be 
desirable to occupy the land during the early part of the year with 
some crop that does not require much spring and summer handling. 
We find such a crop in oats or rye, which may be grown for grain, for 
green feed, or for grazing, or to be turned under for soil improvement. 

The one-half acre of white potatoes for family use, with the 3 J 
now imder consideration for market purposes, will require 4 acres of 
oats to precede them. We have 1 acre of the 12 acres of oats pro- 
vided for the live stock that has no crop after it, so we will need 3 
additional acres of oats. 

The monthly labor requirements of the 3 acres of oats and the 3^ 
acres of potatoes appear in lines 14 and 15 of Table XVIII and the 
monthly sums in line 16. These amounts taken from the available 
time in line 13 still leave a good working surplus of mule labor. 



24 Department Circular 83, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. 
Table X.YIII.— Adjustment of crops to use surplus male labor. 





03 

1 

1-3 




1 


i 

< 




i 

H-J 


1 


•< 


1 

t 


o 
o 

O 


B 


f.; 

i 

ft 


"3 
o 

Eh 


Mule labor not used 
(days) see Table 
XVI) (1) 


a7.75 


a2.08 


313.84 


15.72 


8.49 


9.11 


33.58 


41.80 


25.16 


21.04 


31.04 


13.24 


222.85 


Crop requirements 
of— Garden vegeta- 
bles, J acre... (2) 


0.29 

.78 


0.76 
.32 


1.39 


1.09 
.14 


0.79 
.27 


0.52 
.42 


0.68 
.14 

.78 
.24 

.69 

.24 


0.60 


0.47 


0.41 

.06 

.25 
1.74 

.03 








Fruit, f acre... (3) 


0.45 
.50 


0.83 




Late white pota- 
toes, J acre... (4) 


1.14 
.24 


.41 
1.76 

1.26 

.24 












.20 


.62 
1.32 
1.10 






Cowpea hay, 
3 acres (6) 
















Sorghum, 2 acres, 


.84 


I.IS 


1.12 


.78 


1.24 




.94 












Total (8) 


1.91 


2.26 


2.51 


2.01 


2. .50 


3.98 


2.67 


1.98 


4.14 


3.09 


.95 


1.77 




Subtract line (8) 
fromlme (1): 
Mule labor re- 
maining... (9) 
Mule labor for 8 acres 


5.64 
3.36 


-.18 
4.72 


11.33 
4.48 


13.71 
3.12 


5.99 
4.50 


5.13 
3.44 


30.91 


39.82 


21.02 


17.95 
1.36 


30.09 
1.44 


11.47 
3.76 














Total mule labor 
in lines (9) 
and (10) . .(11) 


69.00 


64.54 


615.81 


16.83 


10.49 


8.57 


30.91 


39. 82 


21.02 


19.31 


31.53 


15.23 




Cotton, 10 acres. (12) 


C7.90 


C6.40 


C4.30 


6.80 


5.40 


5.70 


3.40 




1.80 


2.00 


1.90 


6.00 




Subtract (12) from 
(11): 
Remaining mule 
labor (13) 


m 


(d) 


m 


10.03 


5.09 


2.87 


27.51 


39.82 


19.22 


17.37 


26.63 


9.23 




Oats, 3 acres (14) 

Late white potatoes, 
3.5 acres (15) 










.30 


.93 


.36 
5.43 


7.94 


2.64 
2.87 


2.61 
1.75 
















3.50 






















Total of (14) and 
(15) (16) 










30 


.93 


5. 79 7. 94 


5.51 


4.36 


3.50 
















Remaining mule la- 
bor (days); sub- 
tract (16) from (13) . 


W 


W 


C) 


10.03 


4.79 


1.94 


4.72 31.88 


13.71 


12.95 


26.13 


9.23 


125. 59 



a Total for January, February, and March, 23.17. 
6 Total for January, February, and March, 28.81. 
c Total for January, February, and March, 18.60. 
d Total for January, February, and March, 10.21. 

Our reconstructed crop system now stands as follows: Garden 
vegetables, 1 acre; fruit, f acre; late white potatoes, 4 acres; sweet 
potatoes, 1 acre; sugar cane, I acre; sorghum, 2 acres; corn, 22 
acres; oats, 15 acres; cowpea hay, 11 acres; peanuts, 4 acres; cotton, 
24 acres; or 70 acres of crop land and 85 acres of crops. This is 35 
acres of crop land and 42J acres of crops per mule, as compared with 
29f acres of crop land and 33 f acres of crops per mule as originally 
organized, and we are using 72 per cent of the mule labor as compared 
with 52 per cent under the old organization. 



Testing Farms in the South for Efficiency. 25 

As reorganized, these crops can be arranged in a 4-field, 4-year 
rotation, as follows : 

Field 1. 17 acres of cotton. 

Field 2. 12 acres of corn with cowpeas, 4 acres of peanuts, 1 acre of sweet 
potatoes. 

Field 3. 7 acres of cotton, 10 acres of corn with cowpeas. 

Field 4. 15 acres of oats, followed by cowpeas and potatoes, 2 acres of sorghum. 

This rotation does not include the vegetable garden, the fruit, and 
the sugar patch, which will not very well fit into the rotation. 

This reorganization is worked out on the basis of mule labor being 
the main limiting factor. We have assumed that all the crops, 
including the additional cotton, can be handled by the family with 
such additional outside man labor as is available. It has been pos- 
sible to extend the total acreage of crop land because of the large 
acreage of tillable pasture, which was in excess of live-stock needs. 

Had there been no surplus tillable land on which to extend the 
crop area it would be necessary to rent additional land until some 
of the woodland could be cleared or more land bought. Had no 
additional crop land been available changes in the organization could 
have been made only by reducing acreages of some of the crops to 
make room for increasing the acreages of others or for adding new 
crops. 

The reorganization worked out here is not suggested as the best 
one for this farm. Others might have been presented, but this has 
been given simply to illustrate a method of testing and changing 
organization for efficiency in the use of mule labor. The effect of 
organization on efficiency in the use of man labor may be worked out 
in the same manner. 

WORKING CAPITAL. 

16. Is the working capital per mule adequate for efficient 
operation ofthefarmf 

Here again the averages for the best farms of the community may 
be used as a measure in this test. 

Tables XIX and XX give by way of illustration the working capital 
per mule and per farm and its distribution to live stock, implements 
and machinery, feed and supplies, and cash to run the farm, in 
the Sumter County and Brooks County farm communities, and as 
general standards for the regions in which these communities are 
located. 



26 Department Circular 83, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. 

Table XIX. — Distribution of working capital, working capital per mule, and working 
capital per farm on groups of Sumter County, Ga., farms. ( U. S. Department of Agri- 
culture Bulletin 492.) 





Average value of — 


Average 

cash to 

run farm 

per mule. 


Average 

total 

working 

capital 

per mule. 




Farm groups.o 


Work 

stock per 

mule. 


Produc- 
tive live 
stock per 
mule. 


Imple- 
ments 
and 
machin- 
ery per 
mule. 


Feed and 
supplies 
per mule. 


Average 

total 
working 
capital 
per farm. 


Best five l-mule farms . . 


$185 

la-i 

160 
196 
163 

108 


•153 
79 
57 
43 
30 
23 


$63 
68 
51 
54 
43 
60 


S34 
140 
108 
102 
109 
98 


.?115 
115 
145 
114 
158 
93 


S450 
597 
521 
509 
503 
382 


S450 




1,194 


Best five 3-mule farms 


1,563 




2,036 


Best five 5-mule farms 


2,515 


Best five 6-mule farms . . . 


2,292 






Average for 30 farms 


168 


48 


56 


99 


123 


494 







a Selected on basis of farm income; groups same as those in Tables IV, V, and X. 

Table XX. — Working capital perform and per mule, and its distribution to work stock, 
productive live stock, implements and machinery, feed and supplies, and cash to run the 
farm for groups of farms in the Brooks County, Ga., community. ( U. S. Department 
of Agriculture Bulletin 648.) 





Average value of— 


Average 

cash to 

run farm 

per mule. 


Average 

total 

working 

capital 

per mule. 




Farm groups." 


Work 

stock per 

mule. 


Produc- 
tive live 
stock per 
mule. 


Imple- 
ments 

and 
machin- 
ery per 
mule. 


Feed and 
supplies 
per mule. 


Average 

total 

working 

capital 

per farm. 


Best five l-mule farms 


$136 
152 
159 
171 
217 
168 


$95 
141 
109 
100 
90 
103 


$40 
116 
106 

87 
87 
87 


$206 
207 
192 
212 
167 
151 


$11 

10 
25 
34 
20 
60 


$478 
626 
591 
604 
581 
569 


$478 


Best five 2-mule farms 


1,252 




1,773 


Best five 4-mule farms 


2,416 




2,905 




3,414 






Average for 30 farms 


167 


106 


87 


189 


26 


575 







a Selected on the basis of farm income; groups the same as those in Tables VI, VII, and XI. 

The tests and examples given in the foregoing pages deal with 
the most important and fundamental factors that influence effi- 
ciency in the management of the farm, and they are sufficient to 
illustrate the method suggested and also to give some general stand- 
ards for use in the South until standards can be established for 
local communities. 

OTHER TESTS. 

Other tests may follow, dealing with the various items of expense, 
the sources of income, farm practice in caring for crops and live 
stock, the organization of the farm land as a whole, the size, shape, 
and general layout of the crop land with reference to greater effi- 
ciency in the use of labor and machinery, the location and plan of 
the farm buildings with reference to sanitation and convenience 
and the saving of time and labor, and so on in as great detail as may 
be desired. 



Testing Farms in the South for Efficiency. 27 

PUBLICATIONS OF THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
RELATING TO FARM MANAGEMENT. 

Buildiag up a Run Down Cotton Farm. Farmers' Bulletin 326. 

A Profitable Cotton Farm. Farmers' Bulletin 364. 

Replanning a Farm for Profit. Farmers' Bulletin 370. 

What the Farm Contributes Directly to the Family Living. Farmers' Bulletin 635. 

An Example of Intensive Farming in the Cotton Belt. Farmers' Bulletin 519. 

A System of Farm Cost Accounting. Farmers' Bulletin 572. 

A Method of Analyzing the Farm Business. Farmers' Bulletin 661. 

Waste Land and Wasted Land on the Farm. Farmers' Bulletin 745. 

The Use of a Diary for Farm Accounts. Farmers' Bulletin 782. 

Soy Beans in Systems of Farming. Farmers' Bulletin 931. 

How Live Stock is Handled in the Blue Grass Region of Kentucky. Fanners' Bul- 

' letin812. 

Making Hay on Trucks. Farmers' Bulletin 956. 

Systems of Hog Farming in the Southeastern States. Farmers' Bulletin 985. 

Farm Practices that Increase Crop Yields in the Gulf Coast Region. Farmers' Bul- 
letin 986. 

Farm Practices that Increase Crop Yields — Kentucky and Tennessee. Farmers' 
Bulletin 981. 

Farm Household Accounts. Farmers' Bulletin 964. 

Crop Systems for Arkansas. Farmers' Bulletin 1000. 

Producing FamUy and Farm Supplies on the Cotton Farm. Farmers' Bulletin 1015. 

Ways of Making Southern Mountain Farms more productive. Farmers' Bulletin 905. 

What is Farm Management? B. P. I. Bulletin 259. 

A Study of the Tenant Systems of Farming in Yazoo-Mississppi Delta. Department 
Bulletin 337. 

Value to the Farm Family of Food, Fuel, and Use of House. Department Bulletin 410. 

Farming in the Blue Grass Region. Department Bulletin 482. 

An Economical Study of Farming in Sumter County, Ga. Department Bulletin 492. 

Farm Practice in the Cultivation of Cotton. Department Bulletin 511. 

The Seasonal Distribution of Labor in Chester County, Pa. Department Bulletin 528. 

The Business of 10 Dairy Farms in the Blue Grass Region of Kentucky. Depart- 
ment Bulletin 348. 

A Farm Management Survey in Brooks County, Ga. Department Bulletin 648. 

A Farm Management Study in Anderson County, S. C. Department Bulletin 651. 

Influence of a City on Farming. Department Bulletin 678. 

A Study of Farming in Southwestern Kentucky. Department Bulletin 713. 

A Farm Management Study of Cotton Farms of Ellis County, Tex. Department 
Bulletin 659. 

Farm Management Practice in Chester County, Pa. Department Bulletin 341. 

Status of Farming in the Lower Rio Grande Irrigated District of Texas. Department 
Bulletin 665. 

Value of Records to the Farmer. Yearbook Separate 735. 



ADDITIONAL COPIES 

OF THIS PUBLICATION MAY BE PBOCrHED FEOM 

THE SUPERINTENDENT OF DOCUMENTS 

GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 

WASHINGTON, D. C. 

AT 

5 CENTS PER COPY 



